Struggling a bit with many of the same programs, at this point a lot of the details of each program are running together and I had a really had a hard time getting a sense of the programs during the interview days. I feel like so many times in this process reality is much different than what they tell you. Maybe people can give me some help. I'm interested in imaging, primarily advanced echo training. I'm interested in an academic career so the ability to tailor your training and research training are all pluses. Ideally I'd like to go somewhere strong all modalities including Echo, Nuc (PET too), MRI, and CT. The MRI and CT is not essential and a strong echo program would take precedence. As my contribution I've given my take on each program from the interview day and the relative strength of each program. I'd appreciate any help in ranking based on the above factors.
BIDMC: Came in with really high expectations and was a bit disappointed by my interview day. They interviewed 19 people on one day and the organization was very scattered. Some people missed their first interview because the PC didn't tell them that they had to find the interviewers themselves (all on the same floor though). Also thought it was interesting that they interview people from a variety of schools and backgrounds but the people that match there seem to be from tier 1 programs. They mentioned that they like to interview lots of people to "spread the word" about their program, but it seems to reflect poorly if they're not ranking these people highly. Interesting that just about every faculty member has a title for whatever little niche field they were into. Wave Maven hosted out of here. MRI seems very strong with Warren Manning's lab. CT didn't get a great feel for. Echo didn't get a great feel for. Interventions seems just ok although there is someone into vascular work. EP it seems is their crowning jewel with Mark Josephson. They said that its easy to do research at the Brigham and MGH, and they've had someone from MGH leading their research for a few years now. Longwood avenue seems like a nice area. Can anyone give me some more direction with this program? I know its overshadowed by the other two HMS programs in research funding, but what is its reputation outside of that? Would it be equivalent to Michigan/WashU/Emory when taken on its own merit? Is this program stronger than the others on this list? I get the sense that its not in the same league as BWH, MGH, UCSF, Hopkins, Duke but is that a misconception? Are things more organized than the interview day would have you believe?
Emory: A lot of great history here with Andreas Gruentzig and J Willis Hurst, this place has a place in history with intervention. They've been involved with TAVR and the PARTNERS trials for years now. Heart failure is very strong here as they are the major referral center in the region. Congenital heart disease is also very strong being a referral center for the region. Imaging is above average with good echo, pet, nuclear, MRI, and CT all available. But outside of PET the imaging seems to be more clinically oriented than research as CT/MRI are radiology owned. Research position is out of match spot. Clinical tract is pretty balanced all 3 years with call preference given to upper levels. A very big program but the fellows still seem to be a bit stretched covering all the hospital. Program is open to tailoring your experience but you have to find your own funding to do it. Atlanta decent place to live.
University of Washington Seattle: Wasn't quite sure what to think of the program. Really had high hopes. Seems like a decent amount of research money and good reputation. CT/MRI are mostly radiology owned, although there is one attending that does congential MRI. Echo of course is top notch here with Otto and Pearlman. New program director change in last year or two. Seattle decent place to live. Strong congenital program with everyone doing two months during their second year. Nuclear seems a bit weaker but some exposure is present. Other than echo and Seattle can anyone tell me what would make this program better than the others on this list? They had such a laid back attitude during the interview day.
Yale: Wasn't sure what to expect but was pleasantly surprised. Quite a bit of basic, translational, and clinical research going on here. Has plenty of funding for advanced degrees if thats what you're into. Echo and nuclear are very strong here. MRI is present but not a ton of work from cardiology side, clinical machines are radiology owned. CT I didn't get a great sense of. New Haven seems like a bit of a difficult area to live. I think historically they have been a bit behind in Cardiology but appears to be very aggressively trying to catch up. Recent merger with a community program makes this a pretty big program. Not sure if someone with more experience internally with the program could give insights?
UAB: Really nice people. They seem to be a bit in transition with many of their big names focusing on journal editing rather than direct clinical work. Quite a few IMG which was surprising. Cardiology seemed to be located in an older part of the hospital but the overall facilities seemed nice. The program director is into MRI but again all the big stuff is owned by radiology. They do TAVR here. Birhmingham was a bit bigger than I expected but still a pretty small town compared to Chicago/Atlanta. First year sounds pretty busy with all weekend and holiday coverage with things easing up quite a bit as an upper level. Intervention seems pretty robust. Peripheral vascular training is here but you get farmed out to an outside group due to internal competition with vascular surgery. EP seems like it has a huge history here but like a lot of things is in transition. Echo also historically very strong here but didn't get a great feel for it on my interview day.
Case Western: Seems like a very up and coming program. I was apprehensive at first given its next door to CCF, but they had impressive facilities and looks like a very aggressive research push. Their hospital is gorgeous and their cardiovascular institute model seems to be working for them. They were a bit too aggressive in pushing all of the advanced technologies that they do like TAVR and (especially the parachute device). Overall I felt like the training is probably solid, the exposure to a variety of patients and technologies is good, and if you're interested in basic science the presence of the great biomedical engineering department is a boon. MRI is owned by radiology but they have 1-2 cardiologists that work with it. They have 6 MRI's next to each other that seem to work for both research and clinical use with a team of PhD's constantly working in the area. Didn't get a good feel for CT. Cleveland itself seems to be improving a bit but still a bit of a rust belt city.
